Since Mr. Krivit would like us to accept his professional capacity both as
an objective and competent investigative journalist; since Mr. Krivit hopes
that enough of us will accept the conclusions he draws about Mr. Rossi
Co's real agenda, I have found myself questioning why Mr. Krivit seems to be
so relentless in his efforts to paint Rossi as a clever scam artist. From my
perspective Krivits' efforts strike me as having transformed into an
exceedingly one-dimensional attack against the reputation of a single
individual: Andrea Rossi.
In retrospect, I realize that Krivit pursuing such an agenda was not
entirely unexpected. In the past Krivit has followed a similar agenda of
going after the personal reputations of certain academics such as during the
despicable Bubblegate debacle. Back then, I think Krivit garnering a lot of
well deserved positive feedback for his tenacious efforts in revealing the
dirt. In my mind, Krivit deserved the complements he received.
But today we are talking about Andrea Rossi. We are talking about Rossi's
professional reputation and why Krivit's agenda seems to be focused on
dismantling the reputation of Rossi.
As Jed recently pointed out, there seems to be no wiggle room left. What can
Krivit do if it turns out that Rossi's controversial work is determined to
be authentic? Despite all the scientific flaws currently associated with
Rossi's controversial eCats many intelligent, well-informed scientifically
literate individuals continue to suspect Rossi's eCats, flawed as they may
be within the scientific community, are the genuine article. Under the
circumstances I have remained baffled over the fact that Krivit seems to be
oblivious to their observations.
For Krivit to have essentially cornered himself in the manner that he has
chosen raises serious questions in my mind. He is now risking his
professional career in an All-for-Nothing gamble based on what is
essentially a personal hunch - Krivit's personal hunch. The agenda Krivit
currently seems to be pursuing strikes me as having little to do with
investigative journalism. It strikes me more as mirroring the classic novel,
Moby Dick, of Captain Ahab's relentless pursuit of the white whale. I've
personally witnessed this kind of hunt in the past, such as in the
dysfunctional behaviors of other investigative reporters I've known. I
recall a string of relentless attacks from UFO investigator Kevin Randle
that had been launched against his former partner Don Schmitt after Schmitt
disgraced himself by lying to Randle over in incredibly petty matter.
Nothing good comes of such relentless attacks other than the generation of a
lot of juicy UFO tabloid sensation that was of interest only to a small
incestuous inner circle of UFO investigators and gawkers. Years of wasted
effort that could have been more productively channeled elsewhere.
And now, on to some of my personal observations:
Two former NET BoD members (prior to me) had been active Vortex-l
participants. I could be wrong but I'm under the impression that at present
none on the current BoD membership check vortex posts. If some still do,
they probably do so only sporadically - perhaps to monitor the posts of
certain individuals of passing interest to them. IOW, associations with the
Vort Collective appear to have been systematically eliminated from the
ability of making any kind of useful contribution to NET's BoD, and to Mr.
Krivit.
I noticed that any BoD member Mr. Krivit perceived as challenging his
authority or his job performance was asked to resign. This in itself is
certainly understandable. NET is, after all, Mr. Krivit's baby and he can
bring it up anyway he chooses.
When Krivit demanded the resignation of a certain vortex participating BoD
member I did my best to intercede on BoD's behalf. I suggested that the
member's resignation would be unwise, a waste of a valuable resource. I
don't know if it was due to my personal efforts or not, but the Vortex
participating BoD member remained, at least temporarily. Unfortunately,
after I resigned he was soon kicked out.
Mr. Krivit appeared to have become terrified of Mr. Lomax. Much of the
Lomax/Krivit conflict came to the forefront in the aftermath of NET's
infamous Issue #34, where Krivit questioned the conclusions certain
prominent cold fusion researchers had arrived at. Krivit concluded that
fusion isn't occurring. Krivit claimed that a mysterious nuclear
reaction was instead occurring. (I still don't understand the all-too subtle
distinctions drawn between a fusion reaction versus a nuclear reaction,
even after repeatedly asking Krivit during my capacity as a BoD member.) Be
that as it may, what seriously concerned me was the fact that Krivit was
claiming that cold fusion evidence had been deliberately manipulated in
such a fashion as to indicate fusion had occurred when in Krivit's opinion
it really hadn't. The implication was that the professional reputations of
certain prominent
